验证基于回归的轻度认知障碍和阿尔茨海默病变化公式。

IF 4 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring Pub Date : 2024-09-20 eCollection Date: 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1002/dad2.70008
Kevin Duff, Deborah Sevigny-Resetco
{"title":"验证基于回归的轻度认知障碍和阿尔茨海默病变化公式。","authors":"Kevin Duff, Deborah Sevigny-Resetco","doi":"10.1002/dad2.70008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Identification of cognitive decline is critical in older adults at risk for dementia. In a 2020 study reported in <i>Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology</i>, Kiselica and colleagues developed standardized regression-based (SRB) change formulae for the Uniform Data Set 3.0 Neuropsychological Battery in cognitively unimpaired older adults. However, validation of their applicability in impaired individuals is needed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using longitudinal data on 5974 participants (cognitively unimpaired, mild cognitive impairment, dementia) from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center, SRB change scores were calculated for each individual and compared across groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across 6 to 24 months, minimal cognitive change was observed in cognitively unimpaired participants. Modest declines were seen in those with mild cognitive impairment and substantial declines in those with dementia. Change scores were negatively correlated with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale. In impaired individuals, SRB scores indicated more decline in those with positive amyloid scans.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Validation of SRB scores affords greater confidence in employing them in clinical and research settings.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>Validation of regression-based cognitive change scores in impaired samples.Clear differences on change scores across three groups (intact, MCI, dementia).Largely stable scores in intact participants, but notable decline in MCI and dementia.Moderate to strong relationship between change scores and the Clinical Dementia Rating scale sum of boxes.</p>","PeriodicalId":53226,"journal":{"name":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring","volume":"16 3","pages":"e70008"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11413409/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of regression-based change formulae for mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease.\",\"authors\":\"Kevin Duff, Deborah Sevigny-Resetco\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/dad2.70008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Identification of cognitive decline is critical in older adults at risk for dementia. In a 2020 study reported in <i>Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology</i>, Kiselica and colleagues developed standardized regression-based (SRB) change formulae for the Uniform Data Set 3.0 Neuropsychological Battery in cognitively unimpaired older adults. However, validation of their applicability in impaired individuals is needed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using longitudinal data on 5974 participants (cognitively unimpaired, mild cognitive impairment, dementia) from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center, SRB change scores were calculated for each individual and compared across groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across 6 to 24 months, minimal cognitive change was observed in cognitively unimpaired participants. Modest declines were seen in those with mild cognitive impairment and substantial declines in those with dementia. Change scores were negatively correlated with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale. In impaired individuals, SRB scores indicated more decline in those with positive amyloid scans.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Validation of SRB scores affords greater confidence in employing them in clinical and research settings.</p><p><strong>Highlights: </strong>Validation of regression-based cognitive change scores in impaired samples.Clear differences on change scores across three groups (intact, MCI, dementia).Largely stable scores in intact participants, but notable decline in MCI and dementia.Moderate to strong relationship between change scores and the Clinical Dementia Rating scale sum of boxes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53226,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring\",\"volume\":\"16 3\",\"pages\":\"e70008\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11413409/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.70008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alzheimer''s and Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment and Disease Monitoring","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/dad2.70008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介对于有痴呆风险的老年人来说,识别认知能力下降至关重要。2020 年,Kiselica 及其同事在《临床神经心理学档案》(Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology)杂志上发表了一项研究报告,他们针对认知能力未受损的老年人开发了基于标准化回归(SRB)的统一数据集 3.0 神经心理测验(Uniform Data Set 3.0 Neuropsychological Battery)变化公式。然而,还需要验证这些公式是否适用于认知功能受损的个体:方法:利用国家阿尔茨海默氏症协调中心提供的 5974 名参与者(认知功能未受损、轻度认知功能受损、痴呆)的纵向数据,计算每个人的 SRB 变化分数,并进行组间比较:在 6 至 24 个月期间,认知功能未受损的参与者的认知能力变化极小。轻度认知障碍患者的认知能力略有下降,而痴呆症患者的认知能力则大幅下降。变化分数与临床痴呆评级量表呈负相关。在认知障碍患者中,淀粉样蛋白扫描呈阳性者的 SRB 评分显示下降幅度更大:讨论:SRB 评分的验证增强了在临床和研究环境中使用它们的信心:在受损样本中验证了基于回归的认知变化评分。三个组别(完好、MCI、痴呆)的变化评分差异明显。完好参与者的评分基本稳定,但MCI和痴呆患者的评分明显下降。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Validation of regression-based change formulae for mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease.

Introduction: Identification of cognitive decline is critical in older adults at risk for dementia. In a 2020 study reported in Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, Kiselica and colleagues developed standardized regression-based (SRB) change formulae for the Uniform Data Set 3.0 Neuropsychological Battery in cognitively unimpaired older adults. However, validation of their applicability in impaired individuals is needed.

Methods: Using longitudinal data on 5974 participants (cognitively unimpaired, mild cognitive impairment, dementia) from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center, SRB change scores were calculated for each individual and compared across groups.

Results: Across 6 to 24 months, minimal cognitive change was observed in cognitively unimpaired participants. Modest declines were seen in those with mild cognitive impairment and substantial declines in those with dementia. Change scores were negatively correlated with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale. In impaired individuals, SRB scores indicated more decline in those with positive amyloid scans.

Discussion: Validation of SRB scores affords greater confidence in employing them in clinical and research settings.

Highlights: Validation of regression-based cognitive change scores in impaired samples.Clear differences on change scores across three groups (intact, MCI, dementia).Largely stable scores in intact participants, but notable decline in MCI and dementia.Moderate to strong relationship between change scores and the Clinical Dementia Rating scale sum of boxes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
7.50%
发文量
101
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Alzheimer''s & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring (DADM) is an open access, peer-reviewed, journal from the Alzheimer''s Association® that will publish new research that reports the discovery, development and validation of instruments, technologies, algorithms, and innovative processes. Papers will cover a range of topics interested in the early and accurate detection of individuals with memory complaints and/or among asymptomatic individuals at elevated risk for various forms of memory disorders. The expectation for published papers will be to translate fundamental knowledge about the neurobiology of the disease into practical reports that describe both the conceptual and methodological aspects of the submitted scientific inquiry. Published topics will explore the development of biomarkers, surrogate markers, and conceptual/methodological challenges. Publication priority will be given to papers that 1) describe putative surrogate markers that accurately track disease progression, 2) biomarkers that fulfill international regulatory requirements, 3) reports from large, well-characterized population-based cohorts that comprise the heterogeneity and diversity of asymptomatic individuals and 4) algorithmic development that considers multi-marker arrays (e.g., integrated-omics, genetics, biofluids, imaging, etc.) and advanced computational analytics and technologies.
期刊最新文献
Personal social network strengthens adherence to lifestyle changes in individuals with subjective cognitive decline. Longitudinal changes in functional capacity in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Hippocampal volumes in UK Biobank are associated with APOE only in older adults. Marital dissolution and cognition: The mediating effect of Aβ neuropathology. ATN blood biomarkers are related to digital cognitive assessment in type 1 diabetes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1